[TheForge] ABANA

[Demon Buddha]

Aaron Silver wrote:

> Um... I'm gonna disagree with the above because I can't see any instance
> where saving $25K for the same quality product is NOT the right move.

	There are a million ways in which it can be the wrong move,
	especially if it is not done well.  I've witnessed this go
	awry in at least one other non-profit entity.  There are
	some fundamentally different means of managing such things
	and they are different for good reason.  Profit motive almost
	invariably spells death to the quality of nonprofit structures.
	This is not the same as being efficient with funds.  It is 
	primarily a difference in degrees to which one will take a
	risk.  In the case of for-profit, high risks hold the promise
	of high profits (at least they ought to) and can be justified
	on that basis alone.  In non-profit, high risk cannot normally
	be justified because nobody is supposed to be taking a
	quarterly cash dividend.  In non-profit, sensitivity to not
	fixing what isn't broken is far higher than in commercial
	ventures.

	In the case in question, how was the added value determined?
	By what means was it concluded that: a) money would be saved,
	and b) that the quality of the publication would be maintained?